Non-disclosure of educational qualifications in election affidavits does not qualify as a corrupt practice under Section 123 of the Representation of People Act, 1951.

JUDGMENT

1. The present Petition under Section 80 read with Section 100(1)(b) & (d) of Representation of People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as “RP Act”), has been filed by the Petitioner seeking a declaration of the election of Returned Candidate / Respondent No.1 from the Assembly Constituency- 23, Karol Bagh (hereinafter referred to as “AC-23”), for the General Election, held in 2020 to the Legislative Assembly of NCT of Delhi, as null and void on the ground of false and mis-representative facts deposed in Affidavit / Form No.26 furnished by the Returned Candidate / Respondent No.1 alongwith his nomination paper, wherein, the Returned Candidate / Respondent No.1 not only deliberately furnished false averments but also concealed the material facts regarding educational qualification with a motive not only to deceive the Returning Officer / Respondent No.13 but also induced / influence the electoral / voters of AC-23.

2. Shorn of the unnecessary details, the facts leading to the present Petition are as follows:

a) The Petitioner is an Electoral / Voter in the AC-23 and also contested the election from the AC-23 as a candidate from Bhartiya Janta Party (“BJP”) for the General Election, 2020. The other contesting candidates i.e. Vishesh Ravi (“Respondent No.1”); Gourav Kumar (“Respondent No.2”); Rahul Bharti (“Respondent No.3”); Deepak Kumar (“Respondent No.4”); Sunil (“Respondent No.5”); Dharmender Kanwar (“Respondent No.6”); Lekhraj Jatav (“Respondent No.7”); and Gaurav (“Respondent No.8”) are the ones, whose nominations were accepted by the Returning Officer and whereas, the candidates Rahul (“Respondent No.9”) and Mahesh Kumar (“Respondent No.10”) are the ones, whose nominations papers were rejected by the Returning Officer from AC-23. Thereto, the Respondent No.1 was allowed to contest the said election despite his invalid nomination paper and was also declared as elected in the said election from AC-23.

b) That the Respondent Nos.11 & 12, vide Notification No.CEO/COE/102(22)/DLA-20/2019/8767 dated 14.01.2020, called upon all the 70 Assembly Constituencies of NCT of Delhi to elect members of their respective Legislatives Assembly to contest the elections of NCT of Delhi.

c) The relevant dates of election process for all 70 Assembly Constituencies of NCT of Delhi were as follows:

Last date of filing nominations :21.01.2020 Date for scrutiny of nomination :22.01.2020 Last date for withdrawal of candidatures :24.01.2020 Date of poll, if necessary :08.02.2020 Counting of votes for the elections :11.02.2020 Completion of election by :13.02.2020 d) Pursuant to the above-mentioned Notification, the Respondent No.13 was appointed as the Returning Officer in respect of the AC-23.

e) The Respondent No.1, who contested the election as candidate of Aam Aadmi Party (APP) from AC-23, filed his Affidavit / Form No.26 along with the nomination paper for the said constituency.

f) It is stated that after the filing of the nomination paper of the Respondent No.1, the Petitioner filed objections before the Respondent No.13 on the day of scrutiny of the nomination papers during the process of General Elections of Assembly constituencies alleging that the Respondent No.1 had deliberately mentioned false and mis-leading facts in his nomination paper.

g) Pursuant thereto, the objections filed by the Petitioner were rejected by the Respondent No.13 vide Order dated 22.01.2020, which was subsequently challenged before this Court in Writ Petition No.1238/2020 on 30.01.2020. The said Writ Petition was dismissed by this Court vide Order dated 03.02